Melgar v. Zicam LLC, et al
Filing
128
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 6/22/16: Proposed Notice Plan Hearing RESET for 7/28/2016 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 7 (MCE) before District Judge Morrison C. England Jr.. (Kaminski, H)
1
6
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
Scott A. Bursor (State Bar No. 276006)
L. Timothy Fisher (State Bar No. 191626)
Annick M. Persinger (State Bar No. 272996)
1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 300-4455
Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
E-Mail: scott@bursor.com
ltfisher@bursor.com
apersinger@bursor.com
7
Class Counsel
8
13
DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP
Alan J. Lazarus (State Bar No. 129767)
William A. Hanssen (State Bar No. 110613)
Ashley K. Corkery (State Bar. No. 301380)
50 Fremont Street, 20th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 591-7500
Facsimile: (415) 591-7510
E-Mail: alan.lazarus@dbr.com
william.hanssen@dbr.com
ashley.corkery@dbr.com
14
Counsel for Defendants
2
3
4
5
9
10
11
12
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
18
YESENIA MELGAR, on Behalf of Herself and
all Others Similarly Situated,
19
20
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 2:14-cv-00160-MCE-AC
STIPULATION AND ORDER
CONTINUING HEARING ON
PLAINTIFF’S PROPOSED NOTICE
PLAN
21
22
23
ZICAM LLC and MATRIXX INITIATIVES,
INC.
Defendants.
Courtroom: 7
Hon. Morrison C. England, Jr.
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING HEARING DATE
CASE NO. 2:14-CV-00160-MCE-AC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Plaintiff Yesenia Melgar, on behalf of herself and the certified class (“Plaintiff”), and
Defendants Zicam LLC and Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. (collectively “Defendants”), by and through
their respective attorneys, hereby stipulate as follows:
WHEREAS, on June 15, 2016, the Court issued a Minute Order vacating the June 16, 2016
hearing on Plaintiff’s Proposed Notice Plan and re-scheduled the hearing for June 30, 2016. Dkt.
No. 126.
WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s counsel L. Timothy Fisher is unavailable on June 30, 2016 due to a
deposition scheduled in another case.
WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s counsel and Defendants’ counsel have agreed, subject to the
Court’s approval, to re-schedule the hearing on Plaintiff’s Proposed Notice Plan from June 30,
2016 to July 28, 2016 or as soon thereafter as the Court is available.
Now, therefore, the parties, through the undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate as follows:
1.
The hearing on Plaintiff’s Proposed Notice Plan currently set for June 30, 2016 at
2:00 p.m. shall be vacated.
2.
The hearing on Plaintiff’s Proposed Notice Plan shall be re-scheduled for July 28,
2016 at 2:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the Court is available.
17
18
Dated: June 20, 2016
Respectfully submitted,
19
20
21
22
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
By:
/s/ L. Timothy Fisher
L. Timothy Fisher
27
Scott A. Bursor (State Bar No. 276006)
L. Timothy Fisher (State Bar No. 191626)
Annick M. Persinger (State Bar No. 272996)
1990 North California Boulevard, Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 300-4455
Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
E-Mail: scott@bursor.com
ltfisher@bursor.com
apersinger@bursor.com
28
Class Counsel
23
24
25
26
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING HEARING DATE
CASE NO. 2:14-CV-00160-MCE-AC
1
Dated: June 20, 2016
DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP
2
By: /s/ William A. Hanssen
William A. Hanssen
3
4
Alan J. Lazarus (State Bar No. 129767)
William A. Hanssen (State Bar No. 110613)
Ashley K. Corkery (State Bar. No. 301380)
50 Fremont Street, 20th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 591-7500
Facsimile: (415) 591-7510
E-Mail: alan.lazarus@dbr.com
william.hanssen@dbr.com
ashley.corkery@dbr.com
5
6
7
8
9
Counsel for Defendants
10
11
ORDER
12
13
Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, the hearing on Plaintiff’s Proposed Notice Plan
14
currently set for June 30, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. is hereby VACATED and CONTINUED to July 28,
15
2016 at 2:00 p.m.
16
17
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 22, 2016
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING HEARING DATE
CASE NO. 2:14-CV-00160-MCE-AC
1
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?